MELA RAM Vs. BALAK RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts, involved in this revision-petition, against an appellate order of the learned District Judge, Mahasu, are not in dispute, and are as follows:

(2.) The petitioner had taken, on lease, from the respondent, the upper flat of a shop, situated in Shali Bazar, Theog. The lease was for one year, from 1st April, 1959, to 31st March, 1960. The annual rent was Rs. 150/-. The petitioner had paid, out pf the rent, Rs. 50/- on the 7th April, 1959. The balance was payable in two instalments of Rs. 50/-coch; the first instalment being payable in the month of June, 1959 and the second on Diwali, 1959. It appears that the petitioner failed to pay the balance of Rs. 100.00. On the 3rd December, 1959, the respondent filed an application, under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, as applied to Himachal Pradesh, (hereinafter referred to as the Punjab Act), before the Controller, Theog, for the eviction of the petitioner, from the demised premises, on the allegations that the petitioner had failed to pay or lender the balance of Rs. 100/- and that the petitioner was also guilty of such acts and conduct as were a nuisance to the other occupiers of the building. The petitioner did not appear to contest the application and an ex parte order of ejectment was passed against him, on the 4th March, I960- An application, to set aside the ex parte order, was dismissed by the Controller, on the technical ground, that he had no power to set aside the ex parte order. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate, Authority, against the order of the Controller. The Appellate Authority allowed the appeal, holding that the Controller was competent to set aside the ex parte order, on cause, being shown. The order of the Controller, rejecting the application of the petitioner was set aside, and the application was remitted to him for decision, on merits.

(3.) After remand, the application was taken up, by the Controller, on the 2nd May, 1962. On that date, the. respondent made a statement that he had no objection to the setting aside of the ex parte order of ejectment. On the basis of this statement, the application of the petitioner, for setting aside the ex parte order, was allowed. The application of the respondent, under Section 13 of the Punjab Act was taken up for hearing on the same day i.e. 2nd May, 1962. The petitioner made a statement that he had effected a compromise with the respondent and that he had paid a sum of Rs, 87.50nP. out of the arrears of rent, due from him and would pay the balance of Rs. 400/-, in the month of October, 1962. The petitioner, further, stated that in case he failed to pay up the arrears of Rs. 400/in October, 1962, he would be liable to be ejected. This statement of the petitioner was accepted by the respondent. On the basis of the statements of the parties, the Controller passed an order of ejectment against the petitioner, subject to the condition that the order will not take effect, in case the petitioner paid Rs. 400/upto the month of October, 1962.